Talk:Artcraft Fluorescent Lighting Corporation

Untitled

Explanation:

AUTHOR'S NOTE(S)

This company is out of business as of about 2002 therefore this is not an advertisement. It has emphasis of historical significance. You should not serve me as a contributor.

Perhaps if experts wish to contribute to the lead and references and links, that would be greatly appreciated, although they should be from a lighting institute, university, or similar bent.

It is not a wiki fork POV, and indeed is a NPOV. Avoiding characterization in an unbiased manor has been taken at every step to ensure accuracy. As Wikipedia strict guideline state, in part: "COI editing involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote your own interests or those of other individuals companies or groups. Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia the editor stands in a conflict of interest ". And historical interest, certainly does not conflict.

If interested to assist, {{R from plural}} {{R to plural}}

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Boggle987 (talk • contribs) 03:41, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Since the majority of references relating to this article are housed in a Private Family Collection, there is only simple basic information provided for a reason. The sources are of the highest authority and great appreciation for remaining intact, as such, from your auto bot or supervisor(s) is, of course requested from the management of wikipedia.

The sheer fact of being one of the first three companies to manufacture fluorescent fixtures on a wide-scale and being one of the three leading manufacturers obivates the need for an individual cite reference although the CFO did mention that while General Electric held the patent to the bulb, the corporation developed and produced it's own fixtures that are so widely known today as can be found and cited in authoritative books, journals, etc. Consult WWW.USPTO.GOV. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boggle987 (talk • contribs) 11:12, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

There remains not what so ever a conflict of interest from the author as provided content from the author is not the originator of the information.

You appear to misunderstand Wikipedia. There is no management and there are no supervisors. There are just people, who will come by and will make changes to this page.

No one can require that editors of this page be experts. You, as the original author, receive no special provisions for determining page content. Wikipedia articles are 100% open to editing by the public-at-large. If you do not like this, we suggest that you not write articles here.

Now, I only have two fairly minor points about the article as it stands. You keep removing the category, which I don't understand. We like to categorize articles as a method of sorting them. While you are free to add, remove, and change categories as necessary, please do not remove all of the categories from this page.

The "External links" section currently consists solely of links to other Wikipedia articles. These are called "internal" links, because they link to somewhere else inside of Wikipedia. "External" links are links to websites other than Wikipedia. I've removed them from the bottom of the page and integrated them into the body text where possible. Cheers. lifebaka++ 13:37, 10 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your recent explanation and assistance. More work needs to be done to this page and I hope others like you can offer a hand in assisting.

And thank you to all who are assisting in making this article better. 4-2011 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.198.37 (talk) 19:33, 11 April 2011 (UTC)

As better comprehension of this page is taking place with editing and assistance from others, pictures, photos, and video suggestions are welcome. There are a number of pictures and photos I wish to add to enhance the article, yet I would like your input, either expert wikipedians or beginners. That would be much appreciated.

Thanks for the recent condensing of notes and remarks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boggle987 (talk • contribs) 13:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Any relation to...?

[1] in Montreal? No relation? --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:26, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Greetings. Since the company information dating back to 1955 is unclear at the moment, presently, I am unsure if there is a relation to your entity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boggle987 (talk • contribs) 20:31, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

There appears to be no relation to Artcraft of Montreal as of the informtion I have in 2012. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.198.37 (talk) 12:12, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

Viewer Comments [even little ones]

Nice. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.200.198.37 (talk) 12:24, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Private Collection

The majority of the holdings are housed in a private family collection and have non-online references purposefully and for a reason. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CC8C:6250:D824:71A5:8214:872B (talk) 09:26, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

If the sources are not online, how do you know what they say? Have you seen them? Perhaps you can quote the first paragraph? David.moreno72 (talk) 16:12, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Per WP:Special Cases, THIS IS IN A PRIVATE COLLECTION, hence, PRIVATE. But if you insist, Lloyd Newman served on the Board of Directors of New York University during the mid-2000s, is 84 years old and yes I have seen the source that he provided.

To quote the 2nd paragraph from the collection he provided: "... and the top three manufacturers of fluorescent lighting fixtures from the start were Lightolier, Artcraft Fluorescent, Inc., and Globe Lighting. Artcraft was the first to introduce and manufacture the Showcase light or Display Case light to the market. In later years, Lightolier brought to market, Track Lighting...". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boggle0987 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 12 April 2016 (UTC)

Something just doesn't add up. Here is a document which lists the NYU administration during the mid-2000's

https://www.nyu.edu/content/dam/nyu/financialOperationsTreas/documents/financial_statements/FinancialReport2004-2005.pdf

There is no mention of Lloyd Newman. When you can prove that he was actually a director at NYU, I will let the edits stand, but at the moment, no.

Also, how is it that you have managed to read a document in a private collection? What is the documents name? What is the address of the documents location? Only after you can at least answer these basic questions will the edits stand David.moreno72 (talk) 06:18, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

David,

I appreciate your wanting to be through and taking time on this matter but a simple search does not show ALL Board of Directors, etc., forever. Here is a link of Lloyd Newman holding a seninar for NYU students and his name listed as a coach, among other things for NYU. He is pictured in the second picture in this Forbes Magazine article.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/nyuentrepreneurschallenge/2012/10/17/customer-discovery-is-the-key-coaches-said/#3ba5ab6d6fd9

and take a look on this NYU Stern School of Business site.

http://www.stern.nyu.edu/sites/default/files/assets/documents/con_047422.pdf 9 (Page 35 - Lloyd Newman)

The reason I am able to read documents in a Private Collection is because I AM THE CURATOR of the collection (something that is also private!) something you are forcing to be disclosed here on the internet for all to read. Obviously you don't understand what a Private Collection means. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CC8C:6250:C5C2:8785:66DD:8E65 (talk) 13:07, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

The document name is titled "Lloyd Newman". The address is 1900 Pennsylvania Ave., Room 106, ask for Mildred.

Still not adding up. So "Lloyd Newman" is a business coach. Nowhere in the links does it state that he was on the NYU Board of Directors. So, no evidence that shows that Lloyd Newman was a director at NYU, at any time. Hmm, Not good. And the address of 1900 Pennsylvania Ave is the IMF.

https://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/contacts/contacts.aspx

Not looking good at all.

If as you claim you are the curator, upload an a photo of the page that is being quoted from. And please stop reverting until you can prove your case, which at the moment, is extremely dubious. So far, you haven't been able to substantiate a single claim. David.moreno72 (talk) 14:31, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

When something is not on-line that means you will NOT find a reference to being on-line. Lloyd Newman was not ONLY a business coach, that is only one on-line article reference and him listed as part of the NYU business school. He has taught and been a professor at Pace University for many years and been part of NYU. Just because you don't find him on-line DOES NOT mean that he is not who he is. I will not upload the page that is being quoted from BECAUSE it is not on-line to be uploaded. Don't you understand, these things ARE NOT ON-LINE, so there is no uploading.

Read the WP:Special Cases guidelines. There is no requirement in the rules of Wikipedia for Special Cases to provide you with the non on-line reference, only that I provide you with information that the source exists= Private Family Collection. Stop removing the reliable source reference and start removing the Striplight page information that has NO SOURCE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CC8C:6250:C5C2:8785:66DD:8E65 (talk) 14:48, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

You still have not proven any of your claims. Not ONE. David.moreno72 (talk) 14:58, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

And you are not following Wikipedia guidelines. The claims are proven, but housed NOT on-line. You are such a paradox. You insist on removing this source totally in line with WP: Special Cases, yet you will not remove the Striplight page information that has NOT PROVEN ANY CASE because they have no references. Why one and not the other ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CC8C:6250:C5C2:8785:66DD:8E65 (talk) 15:03, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

Rule 5.1.7 of Wikipedia citations indicates "other" forms of information allowable for citations for references. PLEASE also read WP:Special Cases. And please stop removing this reference and information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Boggle0987 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 13 April 2016 (UTC)

FYI: Here is one of the first announcements of Show Case lighting introduced by Artcraft in 1946 (first choice evidenced in Electrical Consultant) in a reliable, verifiable Trade Magazine (if you keep insisting that Lloyd Newman's non on-line citation is not a reliable reference).

Also, look at "Lighting" search result at: https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&hl=en&q=stainless+steel+artcraft+slimline — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CC8C:6250:ECAE:4E79:71C3:84FC (talk) 07:14, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=showcase+lighting+1946#tbm=bks&q=showcase+lighting+1946+fluorescent+artcraft — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CC8C:6250:ECAE:4E79:71C3:84FC (talk) 06:49, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Slimline Ballast announcement: https://books.google.com/books?id=a8ApAQAAMAAJ&q=stainless+steel+artcraft+slimline&dq=stainless+steel+artcraft+slimline&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiBjLW8z5DMAhWEPiYKHTtDDecQ6AEINDAB — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:304:CC8C:6250:79CC:E238:7178:40A8 (talk) 12:17, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Sources, again

It's hard to follow what happens up ^^ there, but let me put down a couple of rules, the accepted guidelines from which we work. a. Sources need not be available online, but, b. they need to be published. We cannot accept documentary evidence, letters, etc. from private collections. So, this, Zaslowsky, Esq., Daniel (May 1995), "An era a long time ago", Sillman Family Private Collection, 2: 3 is out (obviously "Sillman Family Private Collection" is not a journal). Same with the Levy, Sillman, and Sillman references that follow in this version. Most of the other "sources" are cited in an incomprehensible manner. Is "Electrical Consultant" actually a journal? And why is it also an author-link? Or is "Lighting & Lamps" the journal? Good god this is a mess. I mean, look at this, Chain Store Age - Super Markets, vol. 40, 1964, p. 64. It's awful. First of all the author-link parameter is ridiculous. Second, the "title" is--what? "Chain Store Age" is actually the name of the publication. So what is the title for the article? And who wrote it, if anyone did?

No, this is going to take some work, and User:Boggle0987, it is probably a good idea for you to not interfere: some experienced editors are about to get cracking here. Melcous, David.moreno72, Ohnoitsjamie, and IP 2601, thanks for your help. One more thing, Boggle: that the company is defunct does not mean you can't have a COI--a conflict of interest is not necessarily some financial thing or whatever; it can be emotional or personal too. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 16:58, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

• The private collection rationale is not a strong one for an encyclopedia. If the information wasn't shared publicly in a WP:RELIABLE source, odds are it's not important enough to be included here. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:16, 14 May 2021 (UTC)

Drmies. Thank you so very much for caring so much about a profound impact this company made on humanity. The fact that AFLC was THE pioneer of the fluorescent strip light, the first company to make these lamps we all know around the world, is of huge significant importance and should not be underscored. And yes all those references i.e. Chain Store Age, etc. are publications, journals, trade newspapers. So I would like when you are editing or other to put them back as soon as you are finished editing them. It took many, many , many hours and a lot of American cash dollars to find those facts and journals, etc. references. Please keep them there if only in the accepted Wiki format. Thank you very much -- Boggle0987.

Boggle987 When you say it took 'a lot of American cash dollars', were you paid in any way to contribute to the article, or was that your own money that you spent? Also please note that I have removed all claims that were supported by what appears to be unpublished works, as claims must be supported by published material, no exceptions. Feel free of course to add material that is fully referenced from published works, and when you do, please cite them properly, ie. Title, ISBN, page number etc. May I suggest that you learn to use the templates at the top of the editor (if you put in an ISBN and click on the icon that looks like a magnifying glass, it will even pre fill most of the fields.) Any material added that is not supported by reliable, published sources will of course be deleted. Have a great day and happy editing. David.moreno72 13:21, 19 May 2021 (UTC)

A lot of research dollars was invested in this wiki to ensure accurate and detailed information of a pioneering innovative company as part of the development of the fluorescent lamp business as started ~1939, in the US then worldwide. Period. I am very displeased at DavidM for removing so much very important material. This is not based on a "personal" opinion. Very unreasonable editing, personally speaking. If you take the time to analyze how important this company was to the world for fluorescent lighting, maybe you will include other items. Thank you. Boggle0987.

Boggle987 Please disclose how these 'research dollars' were involved. Did you receive payments or is this your own money? Also, I only removed unpublished material. Please take the time to read WP:SOURCE, specifically where it says 'Source material must have been published' Also, please take careful note of where it says 'Any material lacking a reliable source directly supporting it may be removed and should not be restored without an inline citation to a reliable source.' Thank you David.moreno72 10:27, 24 May 2021 (UTC)